Environmental influences on physical activity behaviours in breast cancer patients: A pilot study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The physical and psychosocial benefits of moderate to vigorous physical activity (MVPA) for breast cancer survivors (BCS) on treatment are well documented. Regrettably, the majority of BCS report insufficient levels of MVPA during treatment. While several studies have investigated the intrapersonal (i.e., attitudes, self-efficacy) and interpersonal (e.g., lack of social support) correlates of physical activity for women receiving therapy for breast cancer, no study has objectively measured and examined the broader environmental-level correlates that have been shown to be important in non-diseased populations. Through the linkage of accelerometry and GPS data, the current study examined what characteristics of the environment influence MVPA in women receiving treatment for breast cancer. Twenty BCS were recruited from the QEII Health Sciences Center in Halifax, NS. Consenting participants were outfitted with an accelerometer and GPS unit to be worn for nine consecutive days. To map where patients were expending the total number of minutes of MVPA, the accelerometry data was linked by time with the GPS data and imported into a geographic information system (ArcGIS) for processing. Once merged, the data was geocoded to discover the locations where MVPA was occurring. Analyses showed that 45% of the BCS did not meet the minimum recommended 150 minutes/week of MVPA (M=140.0 ± 89.3). Those engaging in MVPA did so primarily at home (68%), however additional activity was accumulated during working hours and commuting. Repeated calls have been made to develop multi-level MVPA interventions that target factors beyond individual patient characteristics and a greater understanding of where BCS are engaging in activity will facilitate the development of potential intervention targets in future studies.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".